Google Earth on 64-bit installs with no 32-bit libraries

[SteveRiley]

Interesting... not quite what I meant though, as I'm sure you know!

Whoops... I picked the wrong one. Here, now what do you think? I'll prime your response by stating that Garrett's criticism is spot-on. It isn't sufficient for software to simply "be free." RMS's tunnel vision prevents him from realizing that users matter, too.

[vinnywright]

one can also extract the .deb remove the dependence of ia32-libs repackage it and install ,,,,,,,,,haven't tried it but should work .

VINNY

[Feathers McGraw]

I don't disagree with that, and I don't think RMS would either.

RMS's tunnel vision prevents him from realizing that users matter, too.

I don't think RMS has ever said software only has to be free to be good. In fact, he has publicly criticised Ubuntu for the unity dash feature:

https://m.youtube.com/?#/watch?v=CP8CNp-vksc

Videos like this aren't unusual. One of his most frequent arguments is that free software is important because it empowers groups of users to control the program instead of the program controlling the users.

I think he's concerned with the software being free as a minimum requirement, not as the only thing that matters.

[Teunis]

Ah!
This thread having split over more than one subject and intermingling them shows the typical flexibility of mind associated with the use of GNU/Kubuntu

[SteveRiley]

In that video, RMS starts his diatribe not with an analysis of how best to respect users but an assertion that "free" is the most important objective. Then he bashes Canonical for including non-free stuff. What, exactly, are these non-free things? They're things that large parts of the Internet would become useless without: Adobe Flash, MP3 and AAC and H.264 encoding and decoding, RAR file support, and Microsoft core fonts. Also drivers for NVIDIA, AMD, and Broadcom wireless. Forcing users to go on difficult hunts for these things is disrespectful. He can preach all he wants about how we should use alternatives, but that's not gonna happen now.

He's spot-on though about Canonical's shopping lens disrespecting users. I wish he would spend more time focusing on user respect rather than the more abstract notions of free software for the sake of freedom.

Here's another interesting take.

[Feathers McGraw]

things that large parts of the Internet would become useless without: Adobe Flash, MP3 and AAC and H.264 encoding and decoding, RAR file support, and Microsoft core fonts.

Hmm. I have deliberately avoided installing some of those things (e.g. flash) for the very reasons RMS says proprietary software is often bad: security holes we can't see and patch (or even discuss!), and anti-features like DRM. If I visit a site that requires me to install software that restricts me on my own computer just to view their content, I leave the site. There was a period where I had flash installed but thought about activating it each time... 90% of the time I clicked to play, the flash content was garbage. I don't miss it.

Having said that, I don't think it should be difficult for users to install software like flash if they want to, it just shouldn't be installed by default. You'll notice I'm not running Gnewsense - I like the balance on Kubuntu where you get to choose. Personally, I have deactivated the non-free repos.

Also drivers for NVIDIA, AMD, and Broadcom wireless. Forcing users to go on difficult hunts for these things is disrespectful.

Agreed.

I wish he would spend more time focusing on user respect rather than the more abstract notions of free software for the sake of freedom.

I expect he thinks that once the software is free, the user respect will follow... and I agree. Sure, there will be rubbish free software that doesn't do what people want, but nobody will have to use it. There are enough altruists out there who will/do create friendly distros with all the software that people actually want, and they will be the ones with the influence.

The best way to ensure user respect in the long run is for the software to be free. Maybe he should stress that point more often, but I got it anyway.

[Feathers McGraw]

Oh, and thanks for the link, it's an interesting concept. I agree that measuring freedom in that way would be a step forward.

I do actually think that non-technical users can still make changes by just asking nicely - so many people working on open source projects are motivated by prestige and recognition that you don't really have to know how to code yourself, you just need to know people who do.